Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T00:07:08.715Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Appeals to Civic Virtue Versus Attention to Self-Interest: Effects on Tax Compliance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2024

Kathleen M. Mcgraw  and
John T. Scholz
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In an influential article, Schwartz and Orleans (1967) reported that emphasizing normative obligations to obey the law had a greater positive impact on tax compliance than did emphasizing deterrence factors. In this article, we report the results of a conceptual replication of that earlier experiment, within the context of a dynamic model of tax schema change.

Prior to filing the 1987 tax year return (the first affected by the 1986 Tax Reform Act, TRA), taxpayers viewed one of two videotapes, one emphasizing the social consequences of the TRA and normative duties, the other emphasizing the personal consequences of the TRA and strategies to reduce tax liability. A control group of taxpayers did not receive information about the TRA. Data on attitudes, beliefs, and self-reported compliance were collected at three points during the tax season. Tax return data from the IRS were also obtained. The results indicate that the normative and personal consequences messages had predictable and persistent effects on tax-specific attitudes. However, these effects did not translate into changes in basic values or compliance, as reflected by either the self-report or the official tax return data. Possible explanations for the discrepancy between the results reported by Schwartz and Orleans (1967) and this experiment are considered.

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 25 , Issue 3 , 1991 , pp. 471 - 498
Copyright
Copyright © 1991 by The Law and Society Association

Footnotes

A previous version of this paper was presented at the annual meeting of the Law and Society Association, Berkeley/Oakland, CA, 1990.

This research was funded by NSF Grant SES8710891 and by the Internal Revenue Service. Preparation of the manuscript was facilitated by the Dr. Nuala McGann Drescher Award to Kathleen McGraw. We are grateful to the many people have provided us with assistance and advice throughout the course of this project. In particular, we thank Bill Lefbom and Pat Bennett at the Internal Revenue Service; John Boyle and his staff at Schulman, Ronca, and Bucuvalas, Inc., for implementing the survey component of the research; John Carroll and Bob Cialdini for their advice at various phases; Cheryl Di Carlo, Mary Ellen Kent, Ellen Mills, and Patricia Reisman for research assistance; and Neil Pinney and Marco Steenbergen for their assistance at all phases of the project.

References

BALL-ROKEACH, Sandra, Milton, ROKEACH, and J. W., GRUBE (1984) The Great American Values Test. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
BORUCH, Robert F. (1989) “Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs in Taxpayer Compliance Research,” in Roth, J. A., Scholz, J. T., and Witte, A. D. (eds.), Taxpayer Compliance: An Agenda for Research. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
BORUCH, Robert F., and Cecil, Joe S. (1979) Assuring the Confidentiality of Social Research Data. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CARROLL, John (1987) “Compliance with the Law: A Decision-making Approach to Taxpaying,” 11 Law and Human Behavior 319.Google Scholar
CARROLL, John (1989) “A Cognitive-Process Analysis of Taxpayer Compliance,” in Roth, J. A. and Scholz, J. T. (eds.), Taxpayer Compliance: Social Science Perspectives. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
CIALDINI, Robert B. (1989) “Social Motivations to Comply: Norms, Values, and Principles,” in Roth, J. A. and Scholz, J. T. (eds.), Taxpayer Compliance: Social Science Perspectives. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
ETZIONI, Amitai (1988) The Moral Dimension: Toward a New Economics. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
FESTINGER, Leon (1957) A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FRIEDMAN, Lawrence M., and Stewart, MACAULAY (1977) Law and the Behavioral Sciences Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
GRASMICK, Harold G., and Robert J., BURSIK Jr. (1990) “Conscience, Significant Others, and Rational Choice: Extending the Deterrence Model,” 24 Law & Society Review 837.Google Scholar
HARSANYI, John C. (1977) “Morality and the Theory of Rational Behavior,” 44 Social Research 623.Google Scholar
HEIDER, Fritz (1958) The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HESSING, Dick J., Henk, ELFFERS, and Russel H., WEIGEL (1988) “Exploring the Limits of Self-Reports and Reasoned Action: An Investigation of the Psychology of Tax Evasion Behavior,” 54 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 405.Google Scholar
HOCHSCHILD, Jennifer L. (1981) What's Fair? American Beliefs About Distributive Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
HYDE, Alan (1983) “The Concept of Legitimation in the Sociology of Law,” 1983 Wisconsin Law Review 379.Google Scholar
JUDD, Charles M., DRAKE, Roger A., DOWNING, James W., and Jon A., KROSNICK (1991) “Some Dynamic Properties of Attitude Structures: Context Induced Response Facilitation and Polarization,” 60 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 193.Google Scholar
KINDER, Donald R., and David O., SEARS (1985) “Public Opinion and Political Action,” in Lindzey, G. and Aronson, E. (eds.), 2 Handbook of Social Psychology. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
KINSEY, Karyl A., and Kent W., SMITH (1987) “Income Tax Cheating: Opportunities and Preferences.” Presented at the Midwestern Sociological Meetings, Des Moines.Google Scholar
KOHLBERG, Lawrence (1984) Essays on Moral Development, Vol. 2: The Psychology of Moral Development. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
LANE, Robert E. (1986) “Market Justice, Political Justice,” 80 American Political Science Review 363.Google Scholar
LEMPERT, Richard (1989) “Humility Is a Virtue: On the Publicization of Policy-relevant Research,” 23 Law & Society Review 145.Google Scholar
LEWIS, Anthony (1982) The Psychology of Taxation. New York: St. Martin's Press.Google Scholar
MANSBRIDGE, Jane J. (1990) Beyond Self-Interest. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
MARGOLIS, Howard (1982) Selfishness, Altruism, and Rationality. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
MARGOLIS, Howard (1991) “Incomplete Coercion: How Social Preferences Mix with Private Preferences,” in Monroe, K. (ed.), The Economic Approach to Politics. New York: Harper/Collins.Google Scholar
McGRAW, Kathleen M., and John T., SCHOLZ (1988) “Norms, Social Commitment, and Citizen Adaptation to New Laws,” in van Koppen, P. J., Hessing, D. J., and van den Heuvel, G. (eds.), Lawyers on Psychology and Psychologists on Law. Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
McGUIRE, William J. (1985) “Attitudes and Attitude Change,” in Lindzey, G. and Aronson, E. (eds.), 2 Handbook of Social Psychology. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
NEWCOMB, T. M. (1968) “An Approach to the Study of Communicative Acts,” 64 Psychological Bulletin 393.Google Scholar
PIAGET, Jean (1965 [1932]) The Moral Judgment of the Child, trans. Gabain, M.. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
RAWLS, John (1971) A Theory of Justice. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
REIS, Harry T. (1984) “The Multidimensionality of Justice,” in Folger, R. (ed.), The Sense of Injustice: Social Psychological Perspectives. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
REST, James R. (1984) “The Major Components of Morality,” in Kurtines, W. L. and Gewirtz, J. L. (eds.), Morality, Moral Behavior, and Moral Development. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
ROKEACH, Milton (1973) The Nature of Human Values. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
ROTH, Jeffrey A., SCHOLZ, John T., and Ann Dryden, WITTE (1989) Taxpayer Compliance: An Agenda for Research. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
SCHOLZ, John T., McGRAW, Kathleen M., and Marco, STEENBERGEN (1991) “Legal Change and Social Context: Citizen Adaptation to the 1986 Tax Reform Act.” Paper submitted for publication. (Unpublished, SUNY at Stony Brook).Google Scholar
SCHWARTZ, Richard D., and Sonya, ORLEANS (1967) “On Legal Sanctions,” 34 University of Chicago Law Review 274.Google Scholar
SCHWARTZ, Shalom (1977) “Normative Influences on Altruism,” in Berkowitz, L. (ed.), 10 Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
SCHWARTZ, Shalom, and Netta, INBAR-SABAN (1988) “Value Self-Confrontation as a Method to Aid in Weight Loss,” 54 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 396.Google Scholar
SCOTT, Wilbur J., and Harold G., GRASMICK (1981) “Deterrence and Income Tax Cheating: Testing Interaction Hypotheses in Utilitarian Theories,” 17 Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 395.Google Scholar
SEARS, David O., and Jack, CITRIN (1982) Tax Revolt: Something for Nothing in California. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
SMITH, Kent W., and Karyl A., KINSEY (1987) “Understanding Taxpaying Behavior: A Conceptual Framework with Implications for Research,” 21 Law & Society Review 639.Google Scholar
THURMAN, Quint C., JOHN, Craig ST., and Lisa, RIGGS (1984) “Neutralization and Tax Evasion: How Effective Would a Moral Appeal Be in Improving Compliance to Tax Laws?” 6 Law & Policy 309.Google Scholar
TYLER, Tom R. (1990) Why People Obey the Law. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
TYLER, Tom R., and Paul J., LAVRAKAS (1985) “Cognition Leading to Personal and Political Behaviors: The Case of Crime,” in Kraus, S. and Perloff, R. M. (eds.), Mass Media and Political Thought: An Information-processing Approach. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
TYLER, Tom R., Kenneth, RASINSKI, and Eugene, GRIFFIN (1986) “Alternative Images of the Citizen: Implications for Public Policy,” 41 American Psychologist 970.Google Scholar